National Institute of Justice National Institute of Justice. Research. Development. Evaluation. Office of Justice Programs
Crime Solutions.gov
Home  |  Help  |  Contact Us  |  Site Map   |  Glossary
Reliable Research. Real Results.
Additional Resources:

Program Profile: Reconnecting Youth

Evidence Rating: No Effects - One study No Effects - One study

Date: This profile was posted on December 30, 2013

Program Summary

A school-based prevention program that targets underachieving students at risk of dropping out. The program is rated No Effects. The program had a significant negative effect on conventional peer bonding at the immediate post-intervention follow-up and significant negative effects on conventional peer bonding and peer high-risk behavior at the 6-month follow-up.

Program Description

Program Goals/Target Population
Reconnecting Youth is a school-based prevention program that targets underachieving students at risk of dropping out. The three primary program goals are to:

  1. increase school performance (reflected by decreases in truancy and increases in grade point averages [GPA])
  2. decrease drug involvement
  3. improve mood management (reflected by decreases in depression, anger, and anxiety)

The class concentrates on skills training within the context of adult and peer support. The class aims to help at-risk youth strengthen protective factors while reducing suicide and other related risk factors in four primary areas: school, peers, family, and self.

The program targets students in grades 9 through 12 who show signs of poor school achievement and potential for dropping out of high school (low grades and absenteeism) and who exhibit other problem behaviors such as substance abuse, depression, and suicidal ideation. Students who are eligible to participate in Reconnecting Youth are identified from among set criteria:

  1. The student is behind in credits for a grade level, is in the highest 25th percentile for absences, and has a GPA below 2.3.
  2. The student has a prior dropout status.
  3. The student is referred by school personnel and meets one or more of the criteria in point 1.
Program Components
The Reconnecting Youth class consists of 10 to 12 students and incorporates social support and life-skills training into a daily, semester-long class using a 75-lesson curriculum. The class is part of the high school curriculum, and students are usually invited (but are not required) to participate in the class. Students who do take part in Reconnecting Youth receive course credit for participating.

Program Theory
The Reconnecting Youth class is a theory-based intervention that incorporates components of strain, social learning, and social control theories into an integrated model. The class concentrates on two essential components: social support and life-skills training. The social support elements framing the program are 1) a network component built on prosocial relationship bonds emerging between the teacher and students and within the intervention peer group, and 2) a social support process derived from the group interaction processes and life-skills training. The life-skills training consists of four elements: self-esteem enhancement, decision-making, personal control, and interpersonal communication. Each unit’s presentation is sequenced, beginning with skill introduction, skill development, application, and finally skill transfer and relapse prevention. Problem-related skills are also included in each unit and are applied to the central program goals, such as increasing mood management to decrease depression, suicide risk behavior, and anger control problems.

Key Personnel
The Reconnecting Youth Leader who runs the class (usually a school staff member who excels at working with high-risk youth and has completed the Reconnecting Youth training module) monitors class attendance, school achievement, moods, drug involvement, and social interactions. The Reconnecting Youth Leader also helps establish drug-free social activities and friendships.

Additional Information: Negative Program Effects
A randomized controlled trial (described below in Evaluation Methodology and Outcomes) compared high-risk youth in high school who participated in the Reconnecting Youth program to high-risk youth who did not participate in the program. At the 6-month follow-up, the program was found to have had significant negative effects on measures of conventional peer bonding and peer high-risk behavior, and had no significant effects on measures of delinquency, alcohol use, smoking, GPA, anger, and school connectedness.

Evaluation Outcomes

top border
Study 1
Overall, Cho, Hallfors, and Sanchez (2005) found that the Reconnecting Youth program had a significant negative effect on conventional peer bonding at the immediate post-intervention follow-up and significant negative effects on conventional peer bonding and peer high-risk behavior at the 6-month follow-up. There was no significant impact on any other outcome measure, but the results did vary by site. Results were considered significant if the p-value was 0.05 or less (which means the probability that the difference between the treatment group and control group is due to chance is less than 5 percent).

Delinquency
There was a positive, though nonsignificant effect on delinquency at the immediate post-intervention follow-up. However, this effect faded by the 6-month follow-up.

Conventional Peer Bonding
The results showed there was a significant (p<0.05) negative effect for the experimental group compared with the control group on measures of conventional peer bonding at the immediate post-intervention and the 6-month follow-up.

Peer High-Risk Behavior
There were no significant differences between the experimental and control groups on measures of peer high-risk behavior at the immediate post-intervention follow-up. However, at the 6-month follow-up, there was a significant (p<0.05) negative effect for the experimental group compared with the control group.

Alcohol Use
There were no significant differences between the experimental and control groups on alcohol use at the immediate post-intervention and 6-month follow-ups.

Smoking
There were no significant differences between the experimental and control groups on smoking at the immediate post-intervention and 6-month follow-ups.

Grade Point Average (GPA)
There were no significant differences between the experimental and control groups’ GPAs at the immediate post-intervention and 6-month follow-ups.

Anger
There were no significant differences between the experimental and control groups on measures of anger at the immediate post-intervention and 6-month follow-ups.

School Connectedness
There were no significant differences between the experimental and control groups on measures of school connectedness at the immediate post-intervention and 6-month follow-ups.
bottom border

Evaluation Methodology

top border
Study 1
Cho, Hallfors, and Sanchez (2005) conducted a randomized controlled trial to examine the impact of the Reconnecting Youth program on high-risk students. This 2005 study was designed to replicate earlier efficacy trials conducted on the program (Eggert, Seyi, and Nicholas 1990; Eggert et al. 1994), but to go a step further by examining the program’s effect in a real-world setting.

Students were recruited from nine high schools in two large urban school districts. One school was in a large city in the Southwest (Site A) and the other school was in a large metropolis on the Pacific coast (Site B). Students were eligible to participate if they were at high risk for school dropout (i.e., students in the top 25 percent for truancy and bottom 50 percent for GPA, or students referred by a school teacher or counselor). A total of 1,218 high-risk students participated in the study from 2002–03. In Site A, 532 students were randomly assigned to the experimental group (n=269) or the control group (n=263). In Site B, 686 students were randomly assigned to the experimental group (n=346) or control group (n=340).

In Site A, 87 percent of the district students were Hispanic, 9 percent were black, and 4 percent were white. In Site B, 40 percent of district students were Asian/Pacific Islander, 21 percent were Hispanic, 14 percent were black, 10 percent were white, and 15 percent were American Indian or other race. About half of sample from each site was male. Youth were in 9th, 10th, or 11th grade, with an average age of 15 years. There were no significant differences between the experimental and control groups on baseline characteristics, except for truancy and cigarette smoking, which was slightly higher in the experimental group.

Data was collected from students using a three-part instrument called the High School Questionnaire (Eggert et al. 1994). Outcome variables included achievement and attendance, substance use, problem behaviors, peer affiliation patterns, and student connection to school.

Individuals were the unit of analysis. Pre- and posttest outcome changes were compared between all experimental and control group study participants using intent-to-treat analysis. Program effects were analyzed with analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) using general linear models (GLM), which controlled for the outcome value at baseline as well as for sex, grade, and school. Outcomes from the immediate post-intervention and the 6-month follow-up were examined.

One limitation of the study was attrition. Although a total of 615 students were randomly assigned to participate in the program, only 300 experimental students actually enrolled (49 percent of all randomly assigned experimental students). Experimental students who enrolled in the Reconnecting Youth classes, compared to those who were not enrolled, were younger, had lower GPAs and conventional peer bonding, and had higher affiliation with high-risk peers (all differences were significant at p<0.05).
bottom border

Cost

top border
There is no cost information available for this program.
bottom border

Evidence-Base (Studies Reviewed)

top border
These sources were used in the development of the program profile:

Study 1
Cho, Hyunsan, Denise Dion Hallfors, and Victoria Sanchez. 2005. “Evaluation of a High School Peer Group Intervention for At-Risk Youth.” Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology 33(3):363–74.
bottom border

Additional References

top border
These sources were used in the development of the program profile:

Eggert, Leona L. and Jerald R. Herting. 1991. “Preventing Teenage Drug Abuse: Exploratory Effects of Network Social Support.” Youth & Society 22(4):482–524.

Eggert, Leona L. and Christine D. Seyi, and Liela K. Nicholas. 1990. “Effects of a School-Based Prevention Program for Potential High School Dropouts and Drug Abusers.” The International Journal of the Addictions 25(7):773–801.

Eggert, Leona L. Elaine Adams Thompson, Jerald R. Herting, and Liela J. Nicholas. 1995. “Reducing Suicide Potential Among High-Risk Youth: Tests of a School-Based Prevention Program.” Suicide & Life-Threatening Behavior 25(2):276–96.

Eggert, Leona L., Elaine Adams Thompson, Jerald R. Herting, Liela J. Nicholas, and Barbara Garii Dicker. 1994. “Preventing Adolescent Drug Abuse and High School Dropout Through an Intensive School-Based Social Network Development Program.” American Journal of Health Promotion 8:202–15. (This study was reviewed but did not meet Crime Solutions' criteria for inclusion in the overall program rating.)

Thompson, Elaine Adams, Leona L. Eggert, and Jerald R. Herting. 2000. “Mediating Effects of an Indicated Prevention Program for Reducing Youth Depression and Suicide Risk Behaviors.” Suicide & Life-Threatening Behavior 30(3):252–71.
bottom border

Related Practices

top border
Following are CrimeSolutions.gov-rated practices that are related to this program:

Dropout Prevention Programs
School- or community-based programs targeting frequently absent students or students at risk of dropping out of school. These programs are aimed at increasing school engagement, school attachment, and the academic performance of students, with the main objective of increasing graduation rates. The practice is rated Effective for reducing rates of school dropouts, and rated Promising for improving test scores/grades, graduation rates, and attendance.

Evidence Ratings for Outcomes:
Effective - More than one Meta-Analysis Education - Dropout
Promising - One Meta-Analysis Education - Academic achievement/school performance
Promising - One Meta-Analysis Education - Graduation
Promising - One Meta-Analysis Education - Attendance/truancy
bottom border


Program Snapshot

Age: 13 - 16

Gender: Both

Race/Ethnicity: Black, American Indians/Alaska Native, Asian/Pacific Islander, Hispanic, White, Other

Geography: Urban

Setting (Delivery): School

Program Type: Academic Skills Enhancement, Classroom Curricula, Conflict Resolution/Interpersonal Skills, School/Classroom Environment, Truancy Prevention, Alcohol and Drug Prevention

Targeted Population: Truants/Dropouts

Current Program Status: Active

Listed by Other Directories: Model Programs Guide, National Registry of Evidence-based Programs and Practices